Kosmicki v. Cornhusker Autoplex et al

Filing 19

ORDER - Plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel (filing 18 ) and motion for witness protection (filing 17 ) are denied. Ordered by Magistrate Judge F.A. Gossett. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
RONALD KOSMICKI,
Plaintiff,
V.
CORNHUSKER AUTOPLEX, Inc.,
and CORNHUSKER MOTORS, Inc.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

4:12CV3230

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (filing
18) and Plaintiff’s request that his witnesses be protected against retaliation from Defendants,
the witnesses’ current employers (filing 17).
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter. In Davis v. Scott, 94 F.3d 444, 447 (8th
Cir. 19 96), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals explained that “[i]ndigent civil litigants do
not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel . . . The trial court has broad
discretion to decide whether both the plaintiff and the court will benefit from the appointment
of counsel . . .” Id. (quotation and citation omitted). No such benefit is apparent here.
Accordingly, the request for the appointment of counsel will be denied.
Plaintiff’s request for witness protection will also be denied. Plaintiff has not
identified any specific witness in need of protection, nor has he shown that any witness has
been retaliated against by Defendants, or is in danger of retaliation.
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for appointment of counsel (filing 18) and
motion for witness protection (filing 17) are denied.
DATED September 11, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
S/ F.A. Gossett
United States Magistrate Judge